Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
THE BEST-KNOWN conceptualizations, or models, of comprehension in reading are described and discussed. Special attention is given to models or partial models of comprehension proposed by E. L. Thorndike, J. A. Holmes, and F. B. Davis because these have been tested experimentally. Thorndike and Davis found that knowledge of word meanings and reasoning with verbal concepts are of paramount importance in comprehension. In addition, Davis has reported three or four other skills that appear to have an appreciable core of unique nonchance variance as elements of comprehension. Holmes's substrata-factor theory of reading led its author to select many variables for predicting level of comprehension in reading that proved to be ineffective for the purpose. The statistical procedures used by Holmes have been questioned by a number of critics, especially by Carroll and Davis. While these procedures may be legitimately used for certain purposes, they do not permit the sort of identification of substrata factors in reading that Holmes envisaged.
Frederick B. Davis (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: